“When New York-based trauma surgeon Dr. Mark Gestring started noticing that the motorcycle crash victims he was seeing in the E.R. were getting older, he and some colleagues at the University of Rochester Medical Center decided to do a study. They wanted to find out whether or not it was Gestring's imagination that less and less of his patients were stunt riding kids and more and more, baby boomers and seniors, many of whom had been riding powerful machines beyond their capabilities. Gestring's team gathered ten years worth of motorcycle accident related hospital statistics and found that from 1996-2005, the average age of a person injured on a motorcycle increased from 34 to 39. The fastest growing group of all the injured riders in the study was in the 50-59 range. The group in greatest decline, 20-29.
“Peter Jacobs, president of the Motorcyclists Confederation of Canada, claims that he sees a similar pattern here in Canada.
“’It’s a consequence of the baby boom generation,’ said Jacobs in Toronto Star interview. “’People were into riding when they were young, they stepped away when they had their families and now they’ve got a nest egg, so they buy a bike and get back into riding.’
“He doesn’t believe the study’s findings fully apply here though, adding that Canadian motorcyclists tend to generally be safer riders and, unlike the U.S., Canada has universal helmet laws. But he does agree with the study's main finding that aging motorcyclists are at greater risk and therefore need to exercise greater caution.”
Oookay...
Does the word “sanctimonious” come to mind there? But it’s not Cycle Canada that has the real problem here.
To start with, the actual number of older riders is rising faster than the accident rate – and that’s true in the US, in Canada and in Australia. So the raw figures don’t tell the whole story – in fact, older riders are safer. Gestring’s result is – well, I almost used a naughty word. It’s meaningless. It’s like saying that living is more dangerous today than in the Middle Ages because more people die every year. Err... there are a lot more people alive these days.
But let’s not quibble. Let’s do something constructive instead. Here’s my press release.
“When Peter Thoeming noticed in a Sydney Morning Herald cover story that Australia’s hospitals cause 4550 unnecessary deaths a year, he and some colleagues decided to do a study. Unfortunately, so far there has not been any funding forthcoming from the gummint...”
Physician, look to thine own backyard.
And Peter Jacobs, look at the figures before you insult what I presume is your parents’ generation.
Honestly...
Peter “The Bear” Thoeming






More

Comments
In Oz, the real hazard is roos. All of my falls on bitumin during the last two decades have been down to animals, which have difficulty deciding your age if you're in a fullface helmet. Same with women. They only hop quickly away when my helmet comes off... .
Just a thought. Cheers.
I think that it is fair to say that 50% of the [population has an IQ less than normal and there isn't a bloody thing we can do about it.
Its a fact there are more older returning riders on our roads, many are weekend warriors who only ride on tar if the sun is shinning.
Go for a group charity ride in a city and see how comfortable you are!
I'm a returned rider who takes an active interest when our governments want to look at bike safety and changes to the law.
We bikers need to get involved get the facts get the right statistics and make bike riding important to all road users.
If you want to see more interested and sweet funny clips then you have to visit on phantoo.com
Phantoo
Funny Clips
funny videos
http://www.phantoo.com/
One would assume, that by targeting older riders the real agenda of banning motorcyclists all together becomes more transparent.
The only counter to all the manipulation of data, is to cite the advantages of riding. For instance, motorcycles leave zero footprint on sealed roads which save councils everywhere a huge amount of dollars. Not to mention the lessoning of traffic congestion in cities (e.g. London city centre), and so forth. Simply telling all the doctors, pollies etc that they are narrow minded arseholes will not win over the non-riding voters.
I too am a statistic having returned to motor cycling after a 10+ year absence, I am now 40, and have been back on two wheels everyday for a year now. I know within myself that my road sence and ROADCRAFT is 100% (yes I see the irony) on what it was. Honestly as a 20 something year old rider on a sports bike my mates and I thought we were invincible, we were all about going faster, tighter, harder, closer to the edge, even though we all knew one or two who died or were badly injured. I spent 2 months in hospitle and a year in recovery. I considered myself a good and sensible rider back then, but with the hindsight being 20/20 now I see some of the risks I took should have only been done on the track.
These days older and wiser, I look at my riding skill, ability and most importantly MY ATTITUDE and I know, @ 40 I am a better rider than I have ever been, satistically at least.
The Cycle World article said several things, some of which look suspiciously as though they were made up by the writer, not the researcher - after all, the only actual quotes here were *not* from the good doctor himself.
The abstract of this study says that there are more older riders in Emergency (which makes sense if there are many more older people riding) and that older riders, once they are in Emergency, have more serious injuries, more complications and worse outcomes (which makes sense when you factor in age-related health problems, fitness levels, time in which to acquire pre-existing injuries and health conditions, and physiological changes).
The conclusion is that safety and riding campaigns should be targeted at older riders.
Changing demographics of riders does not come into the outcomes of this study - it only brings the conclusion into question, and without reading the full study I can't say whether the full conclusion isn't "Older riders should be reminded that they don't bounce as well as younger riders." After all, the abstract also starts with saying that we know there are more older motorcyclists on the roads, not with "we noticed more older motorcyclists getting injured." Which suggests that the researchers were well aware of these issues.
I'm wondering if Cycle World actually spoke to Dr Gestring at all.
Unfortunately, as which most basic research, some valuable conclusions might be ignored if the study is taken out of context, and don't be so quick to blame the researcher if all you've read is the Cycle World article.
The abstract is available at http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/sesc/tas/2010/00000076/00000003/art00008